-NRLF 


LIBRARY 

OF  THE 

UNIVERSITY  OF  CALIFORNIA. 

GIFT    OF 

..(^*^ktr^^ 

Class 


JAR  ASSOCIATION  OF  SAN  FRANCISCO 


Report  of 
Section  on  Ethics 


CODE   OF   ETHICS 


Unanimously  Adopted 

by 
Bar  Association  of  San   Francisco, 

Friday,  Octooer  14,  1910. 


BAR  ASSOCIATION  OF  SAN  FRANCISCO 

Report  of 
Section  on  Ethics 


CODE  OF  ETHICS 


CHARLES    S.    WHEELER, 
WARREN  OLNEY  JR., 
GROVER  O'CONNOR, 
CHARLES  A.  SHURTLEPP, 
A.   C.   FREEMAN, 

Members  of  Section. 


Published  by  Authority  of  the  Association. 


OF   TH£ 

UNIVERSITY 


SAN   FRANCISCO 

Recorder  Printing  and  Publishing  Company 
1010 


BAR  ASSOCIATION  OF  SAN  FRANCISCO 

Report  of 
Section  on  Ethics 


San  Francisco,  California,  Oct.   13,   1910. 

To  the  President  and  Members  of  the  Bar  Associa- 
tion of  San  Francisco. 

Gentlemen: 

Your  Section  on  Legal  Ethics  respectfully  reports 
as  follows: 

As  understood  by  your  Committee,  the  phrase 
"Legal  Ethics"  broadly  embraces  every  phase  of 
morals  and  manners  pertaining  to  the  two  branches 
of  the  legal  profession — the  Bench  and  the  Bar — in 
their  relation  to  the  administration  of  justice.  Any 
attempt  to  codify  all  of  the  moral  obligations  of 
the  lawyer,  even  if  susceptible  of  successful  accom- 
plishment, would  serve  no  practical  purpose,  and 
a  Code  closely  defining,  and  demanding  adherence 
to,  rules  of  etiquette  and  set  forms  and  formalities 
upon  the  part  of  members  of  the  Bar  in  their  rela- 
tions with  one  another  and  with  the  Bench,  would 
bear  too  close  an  analogy  to  hated  sumptuary  leg- 


205700 


islation  to  command  the  respectful  attention  of  the 
profession. 

Most  strictly  ethical  truths  are  recognized  intuitive- 
ly, and  are  sufficiently  registered  in  the  reasoning  and 
conscience  of  the  individual,  and  would  not  be  ren- 
dered more  effective  by  codification. 

The  lawyer's  oath,  section  282  of  the  Code  of 
Civil  Procedure,  and  the  code  sections  relating  to 
trusts  and  trustees,  supplemented  by  the  Golden 
Rule  and  certain  of  the  Ten  Commandments  are 
sufficient,  save  under  extraordinary  conditions  as  a 
tangible  expression  of  the  ethical  obligations  of  the 
Bar.  But  it  appears  to  your  Committee  that  occa- 
sion has  arisen  for  a  Code  of  Ethics  differing  in  es- 
sential particulars  from  any  that  has  heretofore  ap- 
peared, and  which  shall  deal  with  certain  phases 
of  some  of  the  duties  which  the  profession  is  mor- 
ally obligated  to  perform  and  which  seem  to  call 
for  emphasis  at  the  present  time. 

There  are  live  questions  stirring  at  the  moment 
which  are  of  vital  consequence  not  only  to  the  Bar 
itself,  but  also  to  the  State  and  the  Nation  in  their 
relations  with  the  legal  profession.  The  Code  here- 
with presented  for  your  consideration  is  an  effort 
to  cope  with  some  of  them. 

Your  Committee  desires  to  speak  plainly  in  ex- 
planation of  the  unmincing  phraseology  in  which  it 
has  purposely  clothed  some  of  its  proposed  canons. 

The  Bar  is  reminded  that  the  President  of  the 
United  States  has  declared,  publicly  and  officially, 


•— 5*— * 

that  the  administration  of  the  criminal  law  is  a 
disgrace  to  our  institutions.  In  this  belief  he  seems 
to  have  the  concurrence  of  all  persons  save  the 
criminal  element  and  their  sympathizers. 

There  is  a  growing  lack  of  confidence  in  the  im- 
partiality and  integrity  of  the  judiciary.  The  be- 
lief is  current  that  lawyers  and  interests  deemed 
to  have  been  instrumental  in  securing  the  nomina- 
tion and  election  to  office  of  divers  members  of  the 
judiciary  are  peculiarly  potent  in  matters  coming 
before  the  Bench,  and  that  our  judges  are  tram- 
melled by  political  obligations  and  aspirations  in 
the  performance  of  their  duties.  Complaint  is  very 
general  that  our  courts  base  their  decisions  rather 
on  hair-splitting  technicalities  than  upon  the  real 
merits  of  the  causes.  It  is  commonly  charged 
against  some  of  our  judges  that  they  perform  little 
work,  shirk  trials,  read  little  law,  and  are  neither 
sufficiently  educated  nor  experienced  in  the  law  to 
have  justified  their  advancement  to  the  offices  they 
hold. 

The  jury  system  has  acquired  the  disrespect  and 
the  distrust  of  a  very  large  body  of  our  citizens. 
There  is  a  belief  in  many  quarters  that  large  inter- 
ests, corporate  and  other,  maintain  bureaus  whose 
business  it  is  to  improperly  influence  jurors,  or 
upon  special  occasions  agencies  are  invoked  for  the 
same  corrupt  purpose.  The  feeling  is  often  heard 
expressed  that  justice  cannot  be  had  from  juries 
in  civil  causes,  notably  in  damage  suits  for  per- 


sonal  injuries  against  public  service  corporations. 
It  is  charged  that  sometimes  corrupt  juries  are  de- 
liberately selected;  that  at  other  times  jurors  are 
corrupted  during  the  trial,  and  that  the  admonitions 
of  the  court  to  jurors  not  to  discuss  with  third 
persons  or  among  themselves  the  cause  on  trial,  are 
generally  and  habitually  disregarded.  Often,  where 
no  suspicion  of  jury-tampering  appears,  neverthe- 
less the  opinion  is  prevalent  that  the  trial  by  jury, 
once  regarded  as  the  buttress  of  our  liberties,  has 
degenerated  into  a  farcical  battle  of  wit  between 
opposing  counsel  for  the  favor  of  the  jury's  verdict, 
with  very  little  regard  for  the  evidence  in  the  case 
or  the  merits  of  the  controversy. 

Many  hold  that  the  statutory  grounds  for  dis- 
qualifying jurymen  have  been  so  far  extended  by 
judicial  construction,  and  in  practice,  that  intelli- 
gent and  fair-minded  men  are  rarely  found  eligible 
to  jury  duty,  and  that  in  consequence  the  intelli- 
gence of  the  average  jury  falls  far  below  the  aver- 
age intelligence  of  the  community;  that  our  system 
of  instructing  jurors  on  questions  of  law  approaches 
the  absurd;  that  in  every  day  experience  jurors  are 
called  upon  to  listen  to  the  reading  of  many  pages 
of  instructions,  replete  with  legal  verbiage  and  at- 
tenuated distinction,  which  few  lawyers  compre- 
hend at  one  reading,  and  which  no  sane  person 
believes  are  understood,  comprehended  or  remem- 
bered by  the  jurors,  and  which,  though  without  ac- 
tual effect  upon  the  verdict,  are  nevertheless  a 


(  UNIVERSITY  I 

\          OF          J 

X44UFOR^^ 


—  7  — 

fruitful  source  of  reversal,  retrial,  expense,  and  de- 
lay. 

One  hears  the  complaint  from  all  directions  that 
the  law's  delays,  both  in  the  trial  courts  and  in  the 
appellate  courts,  amount  practically  to  a  denial  of 
justice;  that  such  delays  are  unnecessary,  and  are 
not  only  tolerated,  but  are  brought  about  by  the 
apathy  of  the  Bench  and  Bar.  It  is  frequently 
charged  that  the  machinery  of  the  law  can  be  so 
manipulated  that,  by  means  of  wearing  and  dila- 
tory tactics  and  expensive  processes,  a  litigant  with 
no  justice  in  his  cause  but  possessed  of  riches  can 
effectually  deprive  a  poor  suitor  of  his  rights,  and 
that  a  large  number  of  the  lawyers  of  this  Bar 
stand  ready,  for  a  fee,  to  pander  to  the  man  of 
property  in  this  prostitution  of  the  law;  that  the 
Bar  is  overrun  with  dishonest  lawyers  and  un- 
principled pettifoggers,  and  that  those  who  are 
themselves  not  actually  dishonest  nevertheless  wink 
at,  or  at  least  take  no  steps  to  prevent,  crookedness 
in  others;  that  the  Bar  is  too  indifferent  to  its  own 
honor  to  bring  about  the  disbarment  of  those  who 
have  disgraced  the  profession;  that  it  is  too  selfish 
and  inert  to  perform  the  duties  morally  resting 
upon  it  as  a  body;  that  it  is  too  cowardly  as  a  body 
to  beard  and  call  to  account  a  judge  it  may  know 
to  be  shirking  and  neglecting  his  judicial  duties,  or 
otherwise  bringing  his  high  office  into  disrepute; 
that  the  Bar  does  not  uphold  the  courts  against 
what  it  may  know  to  be  unjust  assault  and  ground- 


less  public  clamor,  and,  generally,  that  in  matters 
calling  for  character,  independence  of  action,  moral 
courage,  and  professional  self-respect,  it  is  shock- 
ingly deficient. 

The  foregoing,  and  other  current  beliefs  of  a 
kindred  nature,  however  exaggerated  they  may  be, 
and  however  unjustified  by  actual  facts  and  con- 
ditions, are  nevertheless  seriously  undermining  the 
people's  respect  for  the  law,  and  it  will  not  do  for 
the  Bar  to  close  its  eyes  to  their  existence. 

The  Code  of  Ethics  herewith  presented  does  not 
attempt  to  investigate  or  pass  upon  the  justness  of 
the  complaints  enumerated  above.  It  assumes  the 
integrity  of  the  Bar  and  Bench,  but  while  doing  so 
it  recognizes  the  fact  that  these  complaints  exist, 
and  frames  its  rules  with  a  view  not  only  to  the 
correction  of  such  evils  if  they  do  exist,  but  directs 
them  against  any  appearances  which  would  justify 
such  strictures,  to  the  end  that  the  complaints  may 
cease,  and  confidence  in  and  due  respect  for  the 
courts  and  the  Bar  be  correspondingly  restored. 

The  duty  of  maintaining  its  own  reputation  is 
the  paramount  obligation  which  the  profession 
owes  to  itself.  In  order  to  rehabilitate  itself  in  the 
people's  esteem,  it  must  wake  up  and  exact  of  itself 
the  performance  of  its  ethical  obligations.  A  fail- 
ure to  do  so  would  be  a  confession  that  it  is,  as  a 
profession,  unequal  to  the  honorable  duties  which 
a  patriotic  people  has  laid  upon  it. 

Without   organization    the   Bar   cannot   hope   to 


—  9  — 

meet  the  obligations  which  rest  upon  the  profes- 
sion as  a  whole.  Every  man  who  is  fit  to  stay  in 
the  profession  is  fit  to  be  a  member  of  his  local  Bar 
Association.  The  reputable  members  of  the  pro- 
fession and  the  whole  legal  body  owe  it  to  them- 
selves to  exercise  proper  supervision  of  the  pro- 
fessional conduct  of  the  individuals  making  up  the 
professional  body.  By  common  consent,  no  man 
should  be  held  to  be  in  reputable  standing  at  the 
Bar  who  is  unwilling  to  identify  himself  with  the 
organized  Bar.  The  time  when  apathy  and  neglect 
by  the  individual  in  this  regard  can  be  further 
tolerated  has  passed.  Henceforth  it  must  be  made 
an  accepted  canon  of  the  profession  that  member- 
ship in  such  an  organization,  and  a  proper  atten- 
tion to  the  obligations  of  membership,  are  essential 
to  professional  standing. 

A  Code  of  Legal  Ethics  is  not  self-executing,  and, 
of  itself,  is  without  potency  or  vitality.  All  that  it 
can  hope  to  do  is  to  prick  the  consciences  and  help 
in  arousing  the  sensibilities  of  the  profession.  It 
is  action,  and  not  mere  sounding  ethical  phrases 
or  dogmas,  that  the  situation  most  earnestly  calls 
for. 

Respectfully  submitted, 
CHARLES  S.  WHEELER,  Chairman. 

WARREN   OLNEY, 

GROVER  O'CONNOR, 

CHARLES  A.  SHURTLEFF, 

A.  C.  FREEMAN. 


CODE  OF  LEGAL  ETHICS 

OF    THE 

Bar  Association  of  San  Francisco 


i. 

Distinctive  Character  of  American  Legal  Ethics. 

The  Bar  Association  of  San  Francisco  calls  upon 
all  licensed  practitioners  at  the  San  Francisco  Bar 
to  bear  in  mind  that  the  profession  of  the  law,  for 
more  than  two  thousand  years,  has  been  recognized 
as  essential  to  the  social  concept  which  is  the  basis 
of  American  civilization;  that  the  ideals  of  the  pro- 
fession call  not  only  for  ability,  learning,  humanity, 
and  probity,  but  for  a  high-minded  and  unselfish 
obedience  to  the  ethical  truth  that  the  lawyer,  as  an 
officer  of  the  Court,  is  obligated  to  aid  in,  and  not 
to  hamper  or  thwart,  the  administration  of  justice. 

They  are  also  called  upon  to  remember  that  their 
profession  is  incorporated  into,  and  dignified  by,  the 
organic  acts  of  the  State  and  the  Nation;  that  the 
Bar  is  charged  with  the  high  duty  of  supplying  from 
its  limited  ranks  the  Judicial  Department  of  govern- 
ment, the  supreme  importance  of  which  department  is 
emphasized  in  the  circumstance  that  the  people  have 
—  10  — 


—  11  — 

delegated  to  it  the  power  to  adjudge  null  and  void 
the  acts  of  the  two  remaining  departments. 

The  Bar  is  admonished  that  an  incompetent,  cow- 
ardly, or  dishonest  judiciary  would,  if  persisted  in, 
lead  to  the  overthrow  of  American  institutions;  and 
that  a  competent,  courageous  and  honest  judiciary 
cannot  be  looked  for  if  the  Bar  itself  is  incompetent, 
cowardly,  dishonest,  or  careless  of  the  obligations 
resting  upon  it  as  a  collective  body. 

The  profession  should  also  bear  in  mind  that  the 
lawyer,  in  addition  to  his  distinct  functions  in 
reference  to  the  judicial  branch  of  the  government, 
has  always  been  given  much  prominence  in  the  legis- 
lative and  executive  departments;  that  in  the  legis- 
lative department  members  of  his  profession  have 
usually,  if  not  invariably,  outnumbered  the  legislators 
elected  from  any  other  single  walk  in  life,  while  the 
chief  executives  of  the  State  and  the  Nation  have,  in 
most  instances,  been  members  of  the  Bar. 

The  foregoing  considerations,  to  which  many  of  a 
kindred  nature  might  be  added,  emphasize  the  vital 
nature  of  the  relation  of  the  Bar  to  American  institu- 
tions, and  point  to  the  supreme  truth  that  American 
patriotism  is  the  keystone  of  American  Legal  Ethics. 

II. 

Lawyers'  Obligations  to  the  Professional  Body. 

To  the  end  that  the  duties  which  rest  upon  the  Bar 
as  a  professional  body  may  be  performed,  each  lawyer 


—  12  — 

is  in  honor  obligated  to  devote  to  the  common  cause 
a  fair  proportion  of  his  time  and  labor. 

III. 

Organized  Effort  Essential. 

Since  it  is  obvious  that  the  work  of  the  Bar  cannot 
be  effectually  accomplished  without  organized  effort, 
it  follows  that  a  local  Bar  Association  should  em- 
brace in  its  membership  each  and  every  reputable 
member  of  the  Bar.  The  refusal  of  a  member  of  the 
Bar  so  to  identify  himself  with  the  body  of  his  pro- 
fession at  his  earliest  opportunity  is  a  flagrant  dis- 
regard of  professional  duty. 

Each  member  of  the  Bar  is  morally  bound  to  per- 
form fairly  and  thoroughly  the  work  assigned  to  him 
by  the  organized  Bar. 

Duties  of  an  inquisitorial  or  disciplinary  character 
demand  not  only  fairness  and  impartiality,  but  the 
highest  degree  of  moral  courage,  unselfishness  and 
backbone.  Boards  and  committees  called  upon  to  dis- 
charge such  duties  are,  in  an  important  sense,  the 
custodians  of  the  reputation  and  dignity  of  the  Bar. 
Shirking  of  duty  on  such  committees  is  reprehensible 
and  unprofessional  in  a  high  degree. 

IV. 

Duty   to   Maintain  High   Standard  in  Personnel   of 

Bench  and  Bar. 

It  is  the  duty  of  the  united  Bar  to  exert  its  influ- 
ence and  efforts  to  the  end  that  those  only  who  are 


—  18  — 

honest,  intelligent,  and  adequately  prepared  shall  be 
admitted  to  the  Bar;  that  those  only  who  maintain 
their  integrity  of  character  shall  be  permitted  to 
remain  there;  that  those  only  who  are  in  every  way 
fitted  shall  be  elevated  to  the  Bench,  and  that  those 
only  whose  honesty,  industry,  affiliations,  associations, 
and  habits  continue  to  maintain  the  people's  faith 
in  and  respect  for  the  law  shall  be  permitted  to  re- 
main on  the  Bench. 

V. 

Non-Partisanship  in  Regard  to  the  Bench. 

It  is  the  duty  of  the  Bar  to  endeavor  to  prevent 
political  considerations  from  outweighing  judicial  fit- 
ness in  the  selection  of  judges.  It  should  protest  earn- 
estly and  actively  against  the  appointment  or  election 
of  those  who  are  unsuitable  for  the  Bench.  The 
united  Bar  should  likewise  strive  for  retention  in 
office  of  competent  judges,  irrespective  of  their  party 
affiliations,  and  should  exert  its  influence  for  the  re- 
moval of  the  judiciary  from  the  domain  of  partisan 
politics. 

VI. 

Attitude  of  the  Bar  Toward  the  Bench. 

The  lawyer  must  bear  in  mind  that  his  duty  to 
maintain  toward  the  courts  a  respectful  attitude  does 
not  spring  from  his  personal  regard  for  the  incumbent 
of  the  judicial  office,  but  from  the  fact  that  it  is  of 


-.14  — 

supreme  importance  that  the  dignity  of  the  office  shall 
be  maintained.  Bad  opinion  of  the  incumbent,  how- 
ever well-founded,  cannot  excuse  a  failure  to  exhibit 
the  respect  due  to  the  judicial  office. 

Judges  are  entitled  to  receive  the  support  of  the 
Bar  as  a  professional  body  against  unjust  criticism 
and  clamor. 

Where  there  is  a  proper  ground  for  serious  com- 
plaint against  a  judicial  officer,  it  is  the  right  and 
duty  of  the  lawyer  to  submit  his  grievance  to  the 
proper  authorities.  In  such  cases,  but  not  otherwise, 
such  charges  should  be  encouraged,  and  the  person 
making  them  should  be  upheld  and  protected  by  his 
professional  brethren. 

Lawyers  are  admonished  to  bear  in  mind  that  one 
side  or  the  other  must  prevail  in  each  of  the  several 
stages  of  a  court  proceeding,  and  that  it  is  highly 
unprofessional  to  display  temper  either  in  court  or 
out  because  of  an  adverse  ruling  or  decision. 

It  is  reprehensible  and  highly  unprofessional  for  a 
lawyer  to  communicate,  or  argue  privately,  with  a 
judge  as  to  the  merits  of  a  pending  cause,  and  he 
deserves  rebuke  and  denunciation  for  any  device  or 
attempt  to  gain  from  a  judge  special  consideration  or 
personal  privilege  or  favor. 

VII. 

Relations  of  Bench  and  Bar. 

Mutual  respect,  induced  by  high-minded  independ- 
ence in  the  discharge  of  judicial  and  professional 


—  15  — 

duty,  is  a  proper  foundation  for  cordial  personal  and 
official  relations  between  Bench  and  Bar. 

A  judge's  personal  and  political  friends,  who  prac- 
tice before  him,  owe  it  to  him,  to  the  Bar,  and  to  the 
public  to  be  scrupulously  careful  to  avoid  any  ap- 
pearance, act,  or  conduct  susceptible  of  misconstruc- 
tion. 

VIII. 

Profession  Responsible  for  the  Progress  and  Adequacy 
of  the  Law. 

Law  is  a  progressive  science,  and  it  is  the  duty  of 
the  Bar  to  do  its  utmost  to  keep  it  abreast  of  the 
needs  of  the  times.  To  that  end  the  Bar  should  exert 
itself  to  bring  about  the  abolition  of  any  rules  of 
law  or  practice,  however  firmly  grounded  in  prece- 
dent, that  may  appear  to  have  become  unsuited  to 
present  conditions.  Particularly  should  the  Bar 
strive  for  the  abolition  of  any  statutory  or  judicial 
doctrine  not  consonant  with  justice  and  equity. 

IX. 

Profession  Responsible  for  the  Law's  Delays. 

The  Bar  admits  its  full  responsibility  for  such  of 
the  law's  delays  as  are  not  inherently  necessary  under 
our  system  of  government.  This  Bar  recognizes  that 
it  is  an  immediate  and  continuing  duty  on  the  part 
of  the  profession,  on  the  Bench  and  at  the  Bar,  to 
remedy  the  present  tardy  methods  of  conducting  legal 


—  16  — 

controveries.  To  that  end  the  members  of  the  Bar 
are  admonished  that  code  provisions  and  rules  of 
court  regulating  pleadings,  practice,  and  procedure 
are  intended  to  facilitate  and  speed  the  administra- 
tion of  justice.  Those  in  existence  are  recognized  by 
the  Bar  as  adaptable  to  that  purpose  if  their  spirit 
is  insisted  upon  and  obeyed  by  both  Bench  and  Bar. 

To  the  same  end,  the  Association  declares  it  to  be 
not  professional  for  a  lawyer  to  take  advantage  of 
any  imperfections  in  the  machinery  of  the  law,  with 
the  intent  thereby  to  retard,  delay,  or  restrict  the 
speedy  trial  and  conclusion  of  civil  and  criminal  ac- 
tions and  proceedings,  or  the  hearing  of  any  demurrer, 
motion,  or  matter  therein  requiring  a  hearing. 

It  is  not  professional  to  interpose  demurrers  for  the 
purpose  of  securing  delay,  nor  to  carp  at  trivial  de- 
fects in  a  pleading  not  going  to  the  merits;  nor  to 
move  to  strike  out  parts  of  a  pleading  where  no  use- 
ful purpose  will  be  subserved  thereby;  nor  to  obtain 
by  stipulation  or  by  order  more  time  to  plead  than 
is  reasonably  and  fairly  necessary;  nor  to  neglect  to 
demand  a  jury  trial  until  on  or  near  the  day  of 
trial;  nor  ever  to  demand  a  jury  trial  where  the  pur- 
pose of  the  demand  is  to  delay  the  cause;  nor  to  move 
or  request  a  court  to  grant  a  continuance  of  a  cause 
on  statutory  grounds  without  making  a  strictly  legal 
showing,  or  upon  any  other  grounds  without  making 
or  causing  to  be  made  to  the  court  and  opposing 
counsel  a  full,  truthful,  and  unexaggerated  statement 
of  the  reason  therefor;  nor  to  refrain  from  notifying 
the  court  and  opposing  counsel,  as  far  in  advance 


— — 17    - 

of  the  time  set  for  trial  as  the  circumstances  of  the 
case  will  admit,  of  an  intent  to  move  for  a  continu- 
ance; nor  to  move  for  a  change  of  venue  or  to  make 
any  other  motion  in  an  action  or  proceeding,  merely 
to  vex,  harass,  or  annoy  the  opposite  party,  or  to 
put  him  to  needless  expense,  nor  to  make  use  of  the 
delays  necessary  or  possible  in  the  law  for  the  pur- 
pose of  wearing  out  an  antagonist  or  forcing  him  to 
a  compromise. 

It  is  the  duly  of  the  Bench  and  Bar  to  be  punctual 
in  attendance  upon  court. 

It  is  the  lawyer's  duty,  in  the  trial  of  causes,  to 
expedite  the  work  of  the  court  by  admitting  the  truth 
of  all  matters  which  he  knows  to  be  true,  and  not 
to  consume  its  time  by  requiring  proof,  in  the  hope 
of  discovering  and  obtaining  advantage  from  technical 
defects  in  an  opponent's  preparation  or  procedure. 

The  lawyer  is  ethically  obligated,  not  only  to  his 
clients,  but  also  to  the  Bar,  to  take  upon  himself 
no  more  business  than  he  can  properly  and  speedily 
dispatch.  While  reasonable  courtesies  in  the  matter 
of  continuances  are  essential  in  the  experience  of 
every  lawyer,  it  is  inethical  to  expect,  or  to  seek  to 
obtain,  postponements  or  delays  in  the  trial  of  causes 
which  are  either  unreasonable  in  number  or  dura- 
tion, or  which  are  not  absolutely  necessary. 

X. 

Responsibility  of  the  Bar  Relative  to  the  Jury  System. 
The  Bar  must  hold  its  own  apathy  largely  respon- 


—  18  — 

sible  for  the  disrespect  into  which  the  jury  system  has 
fallen.  In  all  cases  a  lawyer  is  responsible  to  his 
professional  brethren  for  his  own  conduct  and  the 
conduct  of  his  employees  in  relation  to  the  jury.  Ex- 
isting conditions  demand  that  he  also  be  held  printa 
facie  responsible  for  any  misconduct  in  the  same  re- 
gard by  his  client  or  his  client's  employees.  To  that 
end  it  is  declared  that  henceforth  the  lawyer  repre- 
senting the  side  employing  improper  means  with  a 
jury  is  presumed  to  be  the  responsible  source  of  such 
scandal,  and  where  such  improper  conduct  is  shown 
to  have  been  employed,  it  is  essential  to  the  profes- 
sional standing  of  the  lawyer  representing  the  side 
involved  that  he  exonerate  himself  before  the  organ- 
ized Bar  from  complicity  in  it  or  connivance  at  it. 

All  attempts  to  curry  favor  with  juries  by  fawning, 
flattery,  or  pretended  solicitude  for  their  personal 
comfort  are  unprofessional.  Suggestions  of  counsel 
looking  to  the  comfort  or  convenience  of  jurors,  and 
propositions  to  dispense  with  argument,  should  be 
made  to  the  court  out  of  the  jury's  hearing. 

A  lawyer  must  never  converse  privately  with 
jurors  or  prospective  jurors,  and  both  before  and 
during  the  trial  he  should  avoid  communicating  with 
them  even  as  to  matters  foreign  to  the  cause. 

It  is  not  professional  for  a  lawyer  to  offer  evi- 
dence which  he  knows  the  court  should  reject  in  order, 
under  the  guise  of  arguing  its  admissibility,  to  get 
the  same  before  the  jury,  nor  should  a  lawyer  ad- 
dress to  the  judge  arguments  or  statements  known 
to  be  foreign  to  the  issue. 


—  19  — 

It  is  particularly  reprehensible  to  introduce  into  an 
argument  addressed  to  the  court  remarks  or  state- 
ments intended  to  influence  the  jury  or  prospective 
jurors  in  the  cause. 

It  is  disreputable  and  unprofessional  to  make,  in 
an  opening  statement  to  the  jury,  or  in  an  offer  to 
prove,  assertions  which  a  lawyer  knows  he  cannot  or 
will  not  be  permitted  to  prove. 

A  too  narrow  application  of  existing  rules  oper- 
ates to  relieve  a  large  part  of  the  most  intelligent 
portion  of  the  community  from  jury  duty.  The 
obligation  rests  upon  the  Bar  to  strive  for  greater 
liberality  in  these  rules  to  the  end  that  juries  may 
possess  the  intelligence  essential  to  true  fair- 
mindedness. 

The  members  of  the  Bar  who  make  up  the 
judiciary  are  respectfully  admonished  that  it  is  the 
concensus  of  opinion  of  this  Association  that  the 
latitude  often  permitted  counsel  conducting  jury 
trials,  particularly  in  criminal  cases,  tends  to  con- 
fuse the  issue,  to  improperly  bias  the  jury,  and  to 
defeat  the  ends  of  justice;  and  it  is  the  intent  of 
this  code  respectfully  to  remind  the  Bench  that  it 
is  the  duty  of  the  courts,  in  their  ethical  relations  to 
the  Bar,  to  hold  all  counsel  strictly  and  impar- 
tially to  the  issues  involved,  in  criminal  and  civil 
jury  trials,  and  to  enforce  their  orders  and  ad- 
monitions given  to  that  end  with  all  of  the  powers 
at  their  command. 


—  20  — 

XI. 

The  Conduct  of  Criminal  Causes. 

This  Association  takes  notice  of  the  opinion  ex- 
pressed by  the  Chief  Executive  of  the  Nation — him- 
self a  distinguished  lawyer  and  judge — that  the 
administration  of  the  criminal  law  is  a  disgrace  to 
our  institutions.  It  further  recognizes  that  the 
remedy  lies  to  a  large  extent  in  the  domain  of 
legal  ethics.  It  therefore  lays  down  the  following 
canons  which  should  be  obvious  but  which  it  be- 
lieves have  been  generally  disregarded  in  the  trial 
of  criminal  causes: 

The  lawyer's  right  and  obligation  to  defend  per- 
sons charged  with  crime  carries  with  it  no  duty  and 
no  right  to  prostitute  either  the  letter  or  the  spirit 
of  the  law. 

The  lawyer's  primary  obligation,  as  an  officer  of 
the  court,  to  assist  in  the  administration  of  justice, 
is  neither  abrogated  nor  diminished  by  his  appoint- 
ment or  retainer  to  defend  a  person  charged  with 
crime. 

A  lawyer  who  invents  or  manufactures  defenses 
for  prisoners,  or  who  procures  their  acquittal  by  the 
practice  of  any  manner  of  deceit,  cajolery,  wilful 
distortion,  or  misrepresentation  of  facts,  or  any 
other  means  not  within  the  spirit  as  well  as  the 
letter  of  the  law,  is  to  be  reckoned  as  an  enemy 
to  society  more  dangerous  than  the  criminal  him- 
eelf ;  while  successes  at  the  Bar  won  by  such  meth- 


—  21  — 

ods  can  never  be  the  basis  of  desirable  professional 
reputations,  but,  on  the  contrary,  are  badges  of  in- 
famy. 

'Whenever  an  attorney's  professional  obligation 
compels  him  to  bring  about  the  acquittal  of  a  per- 
son charged  with  crime  through  the  advancement  of 
a  legal  proposition  foreign  to  the  guilt  or  innocence 
of  the  accused,  his  success  is  to  be  regarded  both 
by  him  and  by  his  professional  brethren  rather  as 
the  culmination  of  a  regrettable  duty  than  as  a  pro- 
fessional triumph. 

'  Lawyers  representing  the  people  in  public  prose- 
cutions should  use  every  proper  means  to  lay  be- 
fore the  jury  the  cause  of  the  people,  and  should 
strive  to  prevent  miscarriages  of  justice  through 
the  exercise  by  persons  accused  of  crime,  or  those 
acting  in  their  behalf,  of  any  improper  or  corrupt 
means. 

In  the  criminal  law  it  must  be  remembered  that 
the  people  rightfully  demand,  and  are  entitled  to, 
not  only  the  conviction  of  the  guilty  but  the  acquit- 
tal of  the  innocent  as  well. 

To  the  extent  of  a  full  recognition  -of  the  fore- 
going principles,  the  feelings  of  the  attorney  charged 
with  the  prosecution  or  with  the  defense  may  prop- 
erly enter  into  his  client's  cause,  but  beyond  this 
lie  should  avoid  bringing  his  personality  or  his 
personal  feelings  or  beliefs  into  a  criminal  cause. 


—  22  — 

XII. 

Paramount  Ethical  Obligation. 

As  a  final  and  emphatic  canon  in  this  its  Code 
of  Ethics,  the  Bar  Association  of  San  Francisco 
admonishes  the  profession  that  its  members  are 
officers  of  the  court  charged  with  the  high  duty  of 
aiding  in  the  administration  of  justice,  and  that 
this  duty  enters  into  and  must  be  recognized  as 
the  dominant  factor  in  the  interpretation  of  any 
obligation  resting  upon  the  lawyer  to  further  the 
interests  of  his  clients  or  to  maintain  successfully 
their  causes. 


205700 


